525. Then he clarifies what he had meant by a sign, when he says therefore, while her husband.
525. Deinde cum dicit ergo vivente, etc., manifestat quod dixerat per signum.
And first, in regard to the obligation of marriage, which continues for the wife while her husband lives. The sign of this is that she will be called an adulteress, if she be with another man, i.e., as wife and husband, while her husband lives: if a man divorces his wife and she goes from him and becomes another man’s wife, would not she be polluted and contaminated? (Jer 3:1).
Et primo quantum ad obligationem matrimonii, quae durat in muliere, vivente viro, cuius signum est quod vocatur adultera si fuerit cum alio viro, scilicet ei carnaliter commixta, vivente viro. Ier. III, 1: si dimiserit vir uxorem suam, et recedens ab eo, duxerit virum alterum, numquid non polluta et contaminata est mulier illa?
Second, he adduces a sign of the fact that the obligation of the law of marriage is dissolved by death, saying, but if her husband dies, she is delivered from the law by which she is bound to the husband, so that she is not an adulteress, if she be with another man, i.e., carnally united to another man, particularly if she has married him: if the husband dies, namely, the woman’s, she is free to be married to whom she wishes only in the Lord (1 Cor 7:39).
Secundo, ibi si autem mortuus, etc., inducit signum quantum ad hoc quod obligatio legis matrimonii solvitur per mortem, dicens quod si vir eius, scilicet mulieris, mortuus fuerit, liberata est mulier a lege viri, qua obligatur viro, ut non sit adultera, si fuerit cum alio viro carnaliter ei commixta, praesertim si ei matrimonialiter coniungatur. I Cor. VII, 39: si dormierit vir eius, scilicet mulieris, liberata est: cui vult nubat.
526. This shows that second, third, or fourth marriages are lawful of themselves, and not only by dispensation as Chrysostom seems to say, when he says that just as Moses permitted a bill of divorce, so the Apostle permitted second marriages.
526. Ex quo patet quod secundae nuptiae vel tertiae vel quartae sunt secundum se licitae et non solum per dispensationem, ut videtur dicere Chrysostomus, qui super Matthaeum dicit quod sicut Moyses permisit libellum repudii, ita Apostolus permisit secundas nuptias.
For there is no reason, if the marriage law is dissolved by death, why the survivor may not marry again. It is not because second marriages are illicit that the Apostle says: a bishop should be married only once (1 Tim 3:2), but on account of the sacramental sign: for he would not be one of one, as Christ is the spouse of one Church.
Nulla est enim ratio, si lex matrimonialis solvitur per mortem, quare non liceat coniugi remanenti ad secunda vota transire. Quod autem Apostolus dicit I Tim. III, 2, quod oportet episcopum esse unius uxoris virum, non hoc dicitur quia secundae nuptiae sint illicitae, sed propter defectum sacramenti, quia non esset unus unius, sicut Christus est sponsus unius Ecclesiae.
527. Then when he says, therefore, my brethren, he concludes to his main proposition, saying, therefore, my brethren, you also have died to the law, by the body of Christ, i.e., in becoming members of the body of Christ, dying and being buried with him, as stated above; you have died to the law in the sense that the obligation of the law ceases in you, so that you may belong to another, namely, Christ, in whom, through rising with him, you have received a new life. Hence you are held obliged not by the law of the former life but by the law of the new life.
527. Deinde, cum dicit itaque, fratres mei, etc., concludit principale propositum, dicens itaque, etc., id est per hoc quod estis facti membra corporis Christi, simul cum eo mortui et sepulti, ut supra est habitum; mortificati estis legi, id est quantum ad hoc quod cessat in vobis obligatio legis, ita scilicet ut iam sitis alterius, scilicet Christi, eius legi subiecti, qui ex mortuis resurrexit, in quo et vos resurgentes novam vitam assumpsistis. Et ita non lege prioris vitae, sed lege novae vitae tenemini obligati.
528. But this application seems awkward, because in the preceding example the man died and the woman remarried without obligation of the law. But here the one released from obligation is said to die.
528. Videtur autem esse dissimilitudo quantum ad hoc, quod in praecedenti exemplo vir moriebatur et remanebat mulier absque obligatione legis. Hic autem ille qui solvitur ab obligatione, dicitur mori.
However, if we consider it another way, there is a parallel, because since marriage is between two, it makes no difference which one dies. In either case the law of marriage is taken away by death. Hence the obligation of the old law ceases in virtue of the death by which we die with Christ.
Sed si recte consideremus utrumque est eiusdem rationis, quia cum matrimonium sit inter duos, sicut quaedam relatio, non refert, quicumque eorum moriatur, ad hoc quod tollatur lex matrimonii: utrumlibet enim contingat, manifestum est, quod per mortem, qua commorimur Christo, cessat obligatio veteris legis.
529. Then he shows the utility of this liberation, when he says, that we may bear fruit.
529. Deinde cum dicit ut fructificemus, ostendit utilitatem praedictae liberationis.
In regard to this he does three things:
Et circa hoc tria facit.
first, he mentions the utility, saying: that we may bear fruit to God. For if we have been made members of Christ and abide in Christ, we can bear fruit, i.e., good works, for the honor of God: as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine (John 15:4).
Primo ponit utilitatem, dicens ut fructificemus Deo. Per hoc enim quod sumus facti membra Christi, in Christo manentes, possumus fructum boni operis facere ad honorem Dei. Io. XV, 4: sicut palmes non potest ferre fructum, et cetera.
530. The second is at for when we were in the flesh.
530. Secundo, ibi cum enim essemus.
He shows that this fruit was impeded when we were under the slavery of the law, saying, for when we were in the flesh, i.e., subject to the concupiscences of the flesh. But you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit (Rom 8:9). Our passions, however, and affections of sins, which were either explained or rather are occasionally adduced as proof by the law, are accustomed to work in our members, i.e., moved our members: what causes wars and what causes fightings among you? Is it not your passions? (Jas 4:1). And this to bear fruit unto death, i.e., so that they would cause the fruit of death: sin when it is full-grown brings forth death (Jas 1:15).
Ostendit quod iste fructus impediebatur, quando eramus sub servitute legis, dicens: cum essemus in carne, id est subditi concupiscentiis carnis. Infra VIII, 9: vos autem non estis in carne, sed in spiritu. Passiones autem et affectiones peccatorum, quae quidem erant per legem, vel notificatae vel augmentatae occasionaliter ut supra patuit, operabantur in membris nostris, id est movebant membra nostra. Iac. IV, 1: unde bella et lites, nonne ex concupiscentiis? Et hoc, ut fructificarent morti, id est, ut fructum facerent mortis. Iac. I, 15: peccatum cum consummatum fuerit, generat mortem.
531. The third is at but now we are loosed.
531. Tertio, ibi nunc autem soluti.
He shows that this usefulness is acquired by those freed from the slavery of the law, saying, but now we are loosed by the grace of Christ from the law of death, i.e., from the slavery of the law of Moses, which is called the law of death, because it killed violators without mercy (Heb 10:28). Or better, it is called the law of death because if offered the occasion for spiritual death: for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life (2 Cor 3:6).
Ostendit quod praedicta utilitas acquiritur ab his qui sunt liberati a servitute legis, dicens nunc autem soluti sumus per gratiam Christi a lege mortis, id est a servitute legis Moysi, quae dicitur lex mortis, vel quia corporaliter occidebat absque misericordia. Hebr. X, 28: irritam quis faciens legem Moysi, et cetera. Vel potius dicitur lex mortis, quia spiritualiter occidebat per occasionem, secundum illud II Cor. III, 6: littera occidit, et cetera.
In which law we were detained, as though servants under the law: before faith came we were confined under the law (Gal 3:23). We have been freed in such a way so that we should serve in newness of spirit, i.e., renewed in the spirit through the grace of Christ: a new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you (Ezek 36:26); not in the oldness of the letter, i.e., not according to the old law. Or not in the old written code of sin which the letter of the law could not remove: I have grown weak in the midst of all my foes (Ps 6:7).
In qua lege, nos tenebamur, quasi servi sub lege. Gal. III, 23: prius autem quam veniret fides, sub lege custodiebamur. Ita, scilicet sumus soluti, ut serviamus in novitate spiritus, in spiritu renovati per gratiam Christi. Ez. XXXVI, 27: dabo vobis cor novum, et spiritum novum ponam in medio vestri non in vetustate litterae, id est non secundum veterem legem. Vel non in vetustate peccati, quam littera legis auferre non potuit. Ps. VI, 8: inveteravi inter omnes inimicos meos.
Lecture 2
Lectio 2
The law makes sin beyond measure
Supra modum peccatum per mandatum
7:7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? [n. 532] God forbid! But I would not have known sin, except through the law. For I would not have known concupiscence, if the law did not say: you shall not covet. [n. 534]
7:7 Quid ergo dicemus? lex peccatum est? [n. 532] Absit. Sed peccatum non cognovi, nisi per legem: nam concupiscentiam nesciebam, nisi lex diceret: Non concupisces. [n. 534]
7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. [n. 540] For without the law sin was dead. [n. 544]
7:8 Occasione autem accepta, peccatum per mandatum operatum est in me omnem concupiscentiam. [n. 540] Sine lege enim peccatum mortuum erat. [n. 544]
7:9 And I lived some time without the law. But when the commandment came, sin revived, [n. 546]
7:9 Ego autem vivebam sine lege aliquando: sed cum venisset mandatum, peccatum revixit. [n. 546]
7:10 And I died. And the commandment that was ordained to life, the same was found to be unto death to me. [n. 549]
7:10 Ego autem mortuus sum: et inventum est mihi mandatum, quod erat ad vitam, hoc esse ad mortem. [n. 549]
7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, seduced me: and by it killed me. [n. 550]
7:11 Nam peccatum occasione accepta per mandatum, seduxit me, et per illud occidit. [n. 550]
7:12 Wherefore the law indeed is holy: and the commandment holy and just and good. [n. 551]
7:12 Itaque lex quidem sancta, et mandatum sanctum, et justum, et bonum. [n. 551]
7:13 Did that then which is good bring death unto me? God forbid! But sin, that it may appear sin, through good, wrought death in me: that sin, by the commandment, might become sinful above measure. [n. 552]
7:13 Quod ergo bonum est, mihi factum est mors? Absit. Sed peccatum, ut appareat peccatum, per bonum operatum est mihi mortem: ut fiat supra modum peccans peccatum per mandatum. [n. 552]
532. After showing that through Christ’s grace we are freed from the slavery of the law, and that this liberation is useful, the Apostle now answers an objection which arises from the foregoing, namely, that the old law seems not to be good.
532. Postquam Apostolus ostendit quod per gratiam Christi liberamur a servitute legis, et quod ista liberatio est utilis, hic respondet cuidam obiectioni, quae ex praemissis occasionem habet, per quam videtur quod lex vetus non sit bona.
In regard to this he does two things.
Et circa hoc duo facit.
First, he solves the objection through which it seems that the old law is not good;
Primo solvit obiectionem per quam videtur legem non esse bonam;
second, he shows that the law is good, at for we know (Rom 7:14).
secundo ostendit legem esse bonam, ibi scimus enim, et cetera.
In regard to the first he does two things.
Circa primum duo facit.
First, he sets out the objection with regard to the law;
Primo ponit obiectionem quantum ad ipsam legem;
second, he solves it, at wherefore the law indeed.
secundo solvit, ibi itaque lex quidem sancta, et cetera.
533. First, therefore, he says: I have said that sinful passions existed by means of the law and that it is a law of death. What shall we say, then follows from such statements? Shall we say that the law is sin?
533. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod passiones peccatorum erant per legem et quod est lex mortis, quid ergo dicemus ex his sequi? Numquid dicemus, quod lex est peccatum?
This can be taken in two ways. In one way, that the law teaches sin: the laws of the people are vain (Jer 10:3), namely because they teach vanity. In another way, that the law is called sin, because the one who gave the law sinned by decreeing such a law. These two follow one from the other, because if the law teaches sin, the lawgiver sins by decreeing the law: woe to them that make wicked laws (Isa 10:1). Now it seems that the law does teach sin, if the sinful passions come through the law, and if the law leads to death.
Quod quidem potest intelligi dupliciter. Uno modo quod lex peccatum doceat, sicut dicitur Ier. X, 3: leges populorum vanae sunt, quia scilicet vanitatem docent. Alio modo, ut lex dicatur peccatum, quia ille qui legem dedit, peccaverit, talem legem ferendo. Et haec duo invicem se consequuntur, quia si lex peccatum docet, legislator legem ferendo peccat. Is. X, 1: vae qui condunt leges iniquas. Videtur autem quod lex peccatum doceat, si passiones peccatorum sunt per legem, et si lex ducit ad mortem.
534. Then when he says, God forbid, he solves the aforesaid objection.
534. Deinde cum dicit absit, solvit praedictam obiectionem.
Concerning this it should be noted that if the law per se and directly caused sinful passions or death, it would follow that the law is sin in either of the two ways mentioned; but not if the law were the occasion of sinful passions and death.
Circa quod sciendum est, quod si lex per se et directe causaret passiones peccatorum vel mortem, sequeretur quod lex esset peccatum altero modorum dictorum, non autem si lex est occasio passionum peccati et mortis.